Displaying Reports
Table versus Diagram | Layout versus Flexibility | Screen versus Paper | Online versus Offline
Nowadays, there are many possible ways of displaying data and to extracting information from this data. However, different presentation options had (and still have in parts) their advantages and disadvantages:
Résumé: Tables and diagrams complement each other well. Flexibility requirements impose fewer restrictions on layout in program design, than was generally presumed until now. In the future, reports displayed online, on the screen, will continue to replace (but not completely) offline displays and printed, paper reports.
Table versus Diagram
Table
Tables offer an ideal opportunity for you to view detailed information in a compact and structured form. A table is often the display method of choice, particularly when the report deals with exact values of individual key figures, or the individual contents of an attribute that is not summable.
When you have a large amount of data, it is advisable to point the user towards essential information, through grouping and emphasizing certain data, to give a clearer overview.
Diagram
However, it is easy to lose track of relevant information when dealing with a large amount of data. Even when you can simplify orientation by using automatic emphases and filters, a picture can often say more than a thousand words. Relationships, trends and summary information are usually much easier to grasp - even at a glance - if they are presented in the form of a diagram.
There are many factors to take into consideration that can favor or hinder how well users register information. Color, size, order, numbering, legends and much more, all have an effect, not only on how quickly information can be absorbed, but also on how many errors are made while doing this. Suitable default values and tips can be helpful here for workers less familiar with the psychology of perception (and this usually concerns report creators).
Blurring the Boundaries
Nevertheless, with only one of the above and not the other, you often get only half the value. For example, a survey amongst managers has shown that they would prefer to have their data presented in parallel in both a diagram and a table. In this way they can quickly obtain an overview, with the help of the diagram, of where distinctive features are, and then, with the help of the table, they can obtain more concrete information. In this case a table is sometimes used as a kind of extended legend.
These combinations are being used more and more often: For example, in a bar chart; if the numeric value appears as a number at the end of the bar in an unobtrusive way, the reader does not have to estimate this value and does not have to check the scale or in the table. Moreover, diagrams in which values can be differentiated according to many criteria are often better displayed not as 3D graphics, but as tables in which each cell contains a graphic.
What does this mean?
Supporting the visual design of the data display from an ergonomic standpoint, simplifies (or makes possible) the job of report creators, who have little knowledge of ergonomics, to design reports so that users can absorb information from the reports faster and with fewer errors. The interaction of diagrams with tables is already simplifying the registration of relevant information.
Layout versus Flexibility
Layout
Many reports, particularly printed ones of course, have a fixed format, such as a form that you cannot, or can hardly, change. These can - with somewhat more work if necessary - be created to suit their planned purpose and used again and again. To some extent, legal standards, other external conventions or internal guidelines set detailed formatting requirements.
Here, you can define specific formats which can differ even from cell to cell. You can also determine the exact interaction of several reports in one layout here. This can simplify the registration and handling of the displayed data to a great extent. A good tool for creating reports supports the user, by making all required formatting available.
Flexibility
For analytical purposes, however, quite different information is required from the reports and therefore, data is examined from quite different viewpoints. Consequently, the number of table lines and columns that are created or the size of the diagram displayed, changes dynamically and sometimes considerably. In addition, users often want to be able to display more tables or diagrams dynamically with additional information. These could contain, for example, further details, or summarized background information.
This has much less to do with the detailed, optimized layout of the individual view, than with presenting the functions for changing the view (which would disrupt the display of a report with fixed layout) so that they are easily and intuitively accessible.
Blurring the Boundaries
However, users often want to change the displayed data segment, even in reports with more complicated layouts, if necessary. This mostly concerns changes to the sorting or filter (and if necessary, also to highlighting), which do not change the actual layout. Such functions, therefore, need to be offered as an option (as they are not always necessary) for reports with optimized layouts, in such a way that the visual presentation of business data is obstructed as little as possible.
Conversely it has been noted that visual appearance is relevant in facilitating quick and easy data entry, even for flexible analysis reports. Therefore, such formatting options also have to be offered here, but must not conflict with the navigation options. Unlike in the tool for creating reports with special layouts, the formatting options do not need to be in the foreground, because they will generally not be used very often and have less significance.
What does this mean?
Layouts with task-specific functions can also be used increasingly in place of generic layouts even in flexible reports. This makes the reports easier to read and increases user satisfaction through a more attractive appearance.
Screen versus Paper
Screen
For a long time, data was only displayed as ASCII lists on the screen. Earlier screens did not support other formats. However, even at this time, screens had an advantage over paper. Data was always up-to-date and the data view could be changed interactively (so long as the tool for displaying reports allowed for this).
However, the user can, as a rule, only see a small section of the data on a screen, than can be displayed on several sheets of paper. This disadvantage can be (sometimes even more than) evened out, however, with suitable navigation options and even the possibility of changing the data view interactively provides a large advantage over paper reports.
Paper
Unlike on the screen, where you can scroll vertically and, if necessary, horizontally and consequently are not limited to a fixed output, sheets of paper have a fixed size. Themes, such as pages breaks, carrying text over, headers and footers and similar weights, have to be considered in this area - all questions, which (perhaps apart form headers) play a less important role on the screen.
The transition from purely character-orientated output to the inclusion of more graphics took place much earlier on paper than on the screen. In cases where the printer itself did not yet support graphical output, the data could be printed onto pre-printed paper. Consequently, the visual appearance of reports has been significant for a long time - especially since reports distributed on paper amongst customers and business partners as well as internally, are also a kind of prestige object for the organization (see also: External versus internal Reports).
Until central data can be accessed from everywhere, paper also has the advantage that it can offer information "offline" and be transported economically. Also, many people prefer to read information on paper. It is also possible to get a better overview on paper when the report deals with large amounts of data. Until now, it has also been easier to make comments on paper than on the screen, where this is still not generally supported.
Finally, many firms still archive reporting data in the form of printed reports. Many programs still do not allow you to save snap shots, but only allow you to save report templates that are re-filled with data when called up.
Blurring the Boundaries
However, since the introduction of graphical interfaces (at the very latest), formatting and graphical items have also found their way into screen display. And not least since the advent of electronic data exchange via e-mail or Web, these can now be exchanged with customers and business partners - without always having to print them out first.
Therefore, the same demands, as on printed, paper reports, now apply to visual formatting on the screen. Pure ASCII lists in fixed font format are no longer state-of-the-art, but have given way to interactive tables and diagrams that allow similar formatting options, such as graphical presentation programs.
Only the limitation of paper size does not apply to on-screen display (keyword: Scroll). Although many people find horizontal scrolling annoying. They would much rather have a flexible layout that fits the width of the display window, on the one hand, to make full use of the space and, on the other hand, to avoid horizontal scrolling.
However, there is still a demand for WYSIWYG, which in this case means that the on-screen display has to deviate as little as possible from the printed version. Naturally, this competes with adapting the output to fit the screen width, so that the creator of the layout has to decide which screen format is more suitable for each specific case.
On-screen reporting is taking over more and more, even in the remaining areas that still use printed reports: Through the Internet and mobile devices, centrally created information is available in more and more places, so that the demand for offline work is falling. Sharper, flicker-free and larger screens mean that the user can read without fatigue, and with suitable navigation aids, the user can get a good overview of large quantities of data, more and more similar to the paper overview. With the market maturity of electronic papers, the factors of 'weight' and 'space' will be less important when reports are transported.
Today, reports are often being exchanged and sent, not by post, but by e-mail. Reports that are distribute among, for example, customers and partners, are becoming unnecessary, since the same reports are being published on Web sites, and can therefore be accessed by several users at the same time. It is important that the user can add comments (see also: Structured versus Unstructured), to remove the remaining advantage of paper reports over screen reports.
As with archiving other documents, the archiving of reports is gradually switching to from paper reports to electronic data carriers. This provides the additional option (which is becoming more and more important) of displaying a combination of current data with archived data and carrying out automatic comparisons. In this way you can, for example, create long-term, but no less detailed, trend analyses.
What does this mean?
By combining the advantages of the printed format with on-screen display, you save paper and also have more reporting flexibility.
Online versus Offline
Online
The possibility of accessing reports online has the advantage that the data, which is the basis of the reports, does not all have to be stored on the local computer. Depending upon the architecture of the display program (thin client or fat client), the program logic does not need to be installed on the local computer either. This saves installation time, memory space and computer performance.
Depending on the application area, however, it is more important that you have access to (more) up-to-date data. Automatic notification can be easily provided (apart from short online connections for sending a message by phone). However, the disadvantage is that you have to be connected to the main computer, which is not always possible, for example, when you are travelling, or sometimes working from home.
Offline
The above problem is eliminated if offline reports are available. The price of this is - along with the possible need to increase the capacity of the computer -less up-to-date data, a price that can not always be overcome. Depending on how much application logic takes place on the local computer, fewer processing functions are available for offline reports. The alternative, working with a thin client in the case of online, and working with a fat client offline, is perhaps not advisable due to double development and maintenance expense (with the danger that both versions end up with totally different user interfaces).
Blurring the Boundaries
Not least thanks to the Internet and mobile devices it is, however, possible to access data online from more and more locations. This has even gone so far as office product manufacturers orienting their strategy towards running their programs mainly on the Internet. As a result the need for offline work is falling - especially since the cost of online connection is falling and access is becoming more widespread.
However, the new challenge here (at least until the data transfer via the Internet is faster) is to decide which functions can be delivered to the front end, and which need to have communication with the back end. Functions delivered to the front end run more quickly, but also need more application logic. Also, if communication with the back end is required, the range of data to be transferred has to be minimized.
What does this mean?
People in more and more places can stop using offline reports and can use the advantages of online reporting without having to install extensive software on the local computer